Derrick account info

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description adds minimal value beyond stating the tool checks account info and credits. It does not describe the return format, specific fields, or any side effects, which would be helpful since there is no output schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the core action ('Check your Derrick account info and remaining credits'). Every word serves a purpose with no redundancy or fluff.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple, parameterless tool with annotations, the description is minimally adequate but lacks detail about what 'account info' includes (e.g., email, name, credits). Without an output schema, more specificity would help the agent understand the return value. It is complete enough for basic use but leaves room for improvement.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

There are zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to elaborate on parameters. The mention of 'account info and remaining credits' gives a hint about the output but is not required for parameter semantics. Baseline of 4 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool checks Derrick account info and remaining credits, using a specific verb ('Check') and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like derrick_credits (which likely focuses only on credits) and derrick_configure (for settings), leaving no ambiguity about its purpose.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as derrick_credits for checking only credits. The agent must infer usage context from the name and description, which is insufficient for optimal tool selection among 21 siblings.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.